search the blog

2010年2月14日星期日

Summary: The Omnivore's Dilemma: Chapter 17

In this chapter, the author discusses the ethics of eating animals. He first points out the animal rightists’ main arguments are that “if [people] believe in equality, and equality is based on interests rather than characteristics, then either [people] have to take the steer’s interest into account or accept that [they are speciesists]” (Pollan 309), and he says such arguments are strong enough to persuade him to practice being a vegetarian. The author finds supports to the animal rightists from the industrial food producers. While they are being raised up, the animals suffer in a compact place. The chicken cannot stretch their wrings, and the pigs’ tails are cut off after they are born. The author believes the animals suffer even more while being killed since journalists are not even allowed to witness the process. In spite of such supports for the animal rightists’ arguments, the author also finds counterexamples that come from the real organic farms like the Polyface Farm. The animals live relatively a happy life on such farms, which the author says is better than the life of their relatives in the wild. The owners of the farm also make the killing process transparent, and the author says the animals die peacefully since they receive enough respect while alive. The author concludes that the practice of killing and eating of animals itself makes biological and evolutionary sense, and people should not blame that as unethical. What is unethical is the practice of raising and killing animals in the industrial food chain. The happiness of animals and the clean kill the author finds on the real organic farms finally persuade him to start eating animals again.

Personal Opinions:
I really like the way the author thinks about the issue in a biological perspective. I agree that the practice of killing and eating animal is an inevitable result of the power of natural selection, which makes evolutionary sense. I also think that both industrial food chain the vegetarian practices are going extremes. Nature has selected humans to be omnivores that raise animals just to feed themselves in a sustainable and environmental-friendly way. Disobeying Nature’s will (or say the nature’s rule) would finally bring about unforeseeable disasters such as the Mad Cow Disease and the Vitamin B-12 deficiency, which people did not predict when they first started the industrial food chain and the vegetarian practice.
I also have a question to ask: for farms like the Polyface Farm described in the book, what should we call them? Currently, I’m calling them “real organic farms”, but I doubt if that is the scientific name. (Or are they the “local food chain”?) Also, I’m wondering where we can find food products from such farms in Ithaca.

1 条评论:

  1. Nice job identifying a key issue about "classifying" different kinds of agriculture. As alternatives to the industrial model of production, how can they be labeled to reflect what they embody? Are the current labels sufficient? And if not, how could they be moreso? I'm interested to see where you go with the biological direction for your paper--after reading your post I see what you were referring to in your earlier question, and I think you've identified an interesting point to expound upon.

    By the way, you can find foods from local farms at the Ithaca Farmer's Market, which is still going through the end of February. It's summer and fall location is on the lake off Route 13, but for the winter months they've moved it to the Women's Community Building downtown on the corner of Cayuga and Seneca. It runs from 10-2 if you're interested in checking it out!

    回复删除